Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 11
CURRENT 10
MSNBC 3
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 26
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
? last week, republicans were saying they were ready to throw grover norquist under the bus. yesterday they proved grover is still in charge. john boehner releasing a fiscal cliff plan but of course, refusing yet again to raise taxes on the top 2%. there you got it. it is not john boehner. it is not mitch mcconnell. it is not mitt romney who's in charge of the republican party. it's a lobbyist by the name of grover norquist. we'll get into that and a whole lot more. first, here's the latest. today's current news update from lisa ferguson. joining us as always from our studios in los angeles. good morning lisa. >> hey bill, good morning everyone. president obama is warning syrian president bashar assad not to use chemical weapons saying that would be a tragic mistake and that assad will be held accountable. u.s. officials are reporting that syria has ordered military chemical corps to be prepared. now syrian state television claims the country has no plans of using chemical weapons, no matter the circumsta
productions. >> stephanie: a lot of people are equally irritated by grover norquist. he is on the meet the press, and i don't understand who he is why anything pays at attention to him. and why he gives the president of the united states instructions. the point is is there a cure chris? >> why yes. >> what it is? >> that grover norquist i can't speak. >> try this. >> norquill? >> yeah. norquill the shut the [ censor bleep ] up so we can get something done medicine. [ laughter ] >> stephanie: i didn't see that coming. i should listen it to first. >> yeah you really should. >> stephanie: i have a nephewture husband this morning. >> does he know? >> stephanie: no. well he does now, if you just give me a second here. >> does he know you are lesbianic. >> stephanie: no. jim stop being a [ censor bleep ]. we kept saying it is treasonist -- how do you sign a pledge to a guy? >> with no political authority of any kind. >> stephanie: right. professor robert thurman is unhappy about the congress critters signing the pledge to grover norquist. he released a video calling norq
explode. plosion they start with some ridiculous premise. people from cnbc like grover norquist is the guest you know will start with a premise that is not favorable to the president on the fiscal cliff. >> they take grover norquist seriously. seriously enough to have him on the panel. >> stephanie: who is he again and why? why does he literally -- >> i have a pledge. i got a pledge! >> stephanie: he was all threateny. if you thought -- >> i've got pictures of people doing naughty things. >> stephanie: he's like tea party two is going to dwarf tea party one. oh grover! [ ♪ dramatic ♪ ] scared grover. >> the tea party kind of crashed and burned of its own volition. >> stephanie: people are on tv threatening the president. here's the thing. i found this great piece in the "wall street journal." we've talked about this before but here's what i hate is we start from the premise that this president has been such a crazy spender. [ cuckoo clock chimes ] this is why i find handy dandy charts so helpful. the
to decide who they are more loyal to, the united states constitution or the grover norquist. >> what is it? >> been i can't sleep. >> here try this. >> norquill. >> norquill the shut the [ censor bleep ] up so we can get something done medicine. available liquid or suppositories. [ applause ] >> stephanie: yes, go ahead. >> caller: yesterday on hurricane irene huckabee's show he went on and on and on about how dare bob costas talk about gun control. >> stephanie: oh boy. he is not even in politics. he just said something reasonable. like this domestic situation would not have resolved this way if he didn't have a gun. >> caller: and any situation that they can be on the wrong side of they find it tweet it say it and it drives me insane. >> stephanie: exactly. and bob costas is satan now. >> we'll have some of that coming up in right-wing world. >> stephanie: good tease. nicely done. >> stephanie: thank you. >> stephanie: jay carney. >> what we hope for is specificity from republicans. >> stephanie: and they gone none. [ buzzer ] >> stephanie: this is what mitt romney was cri
of there, he can become a kind of cross between grover norquist and the jim demint he always was. he can drive these hard right ideas, but he can also sponsor hard right candidates in republican primaries. i think he thinks he's going to be more important at the heritage foundation than he is in the senate. >> let me ask you about that, john. it looks to me not just -- the money is always a draw for some people, i'm not sure it is here. he would have been chairman of the commerce committee if the republicans had won this fight for the senate. they lost it. is it just one of the things that happens when your party loses, you look for something better to do? >> i think this is better where he's looking for a different platform where he can have a louder voice and concentrate on the issues he wants to. >> he's the chief recruiter on the right. he liked christine o'donnell and he ended up rooting for people pretty hard on the right like toomey in pennsylvania, mourdock, akin. he tried to run ron johnson against him. he wants to move the republican senate to the hardest possible right positio
. and opposing tax increases doesn't change that reality. there's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the ageing process. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don't think we have come close to thinking about what that will mean for our economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don
increases doesn't change that reality. there's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the ageing process. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don't think we have come close to thinking about what that will mean for our economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. when you think about it, what does a mature society value and think about how you want to spend your marginal dollar. 25 maybe you want to buy an extra shot or get a video game system. >> i feel like you're making the 25-year-olds look a little trivial. >> if someone says you can spend a dollar to get an extra three month
's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the aging process. if there was, i would take it. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2020s or the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. >> religiously. >> religiously. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for why whatever policies we support need to happen. but particularly the aging of this society, i don't think we've come anywhere close to thinking about what that will mean for the economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. we have to make cuts. when you think about it, what does a mature society value and how does it want to spend its marginal dollar. think as an individual, how do you want to spend it at 25 and how do you want to spend it at 75? at 25 maybe you want to buy an
for the fanel to advance a deal with democrats to cut deficits but -- >> grover norquist drowns himself in a bathtub. after he hears that. >> he made me do it. >> stephanie: two of the republicans that vote most often against boehner. boehner is trying to control his caucus. >> i'll be really surprised -- >> stephanie: these two guys, whatever their names are they said despite sweeping changes to medicare and medicaid, paul ryan's budget didn't make deep enough cuts to entitlement. those guys. yeah, that wasn't quite mean enough. [ applause ] >> i would be surprised if boehner kept his leadership position in the next congress. >> stephanie: really? >> yeah. because he's not -- >> stephanie: i picture eric cantor rubbing his hands together like snidely whiplash. >> he can't keep the caucus together. the republicans are famous for staying together. he can't keep them together. >> flabbergasted! >> that's doing a bad job. >> stephanie: he's flabbergasted at his own caucus. [mumbling] >> stephanie: by the way doesn't
mentioned grover norquist. he's making a new prediction, by the way. let's listen. >> understand how ugly the next four years are going to get. everything in obamacare that obama didn't want you to focus on or think about, the 90% of his trillion-dollar tax increase was pushed over till after he got himself safely re-elected. all those regulations you're now hearing about, okay, those all hit after the election. we've got four bad years of regulation taxes. he wants to add higher taxes to that. tea party 2 is going to dwarf tea party 1 if obama pushes us off the cliff. >> so basically, jon, what grover norquist is saying there to members of the tea party set who have been elected, who were elected, is, you know, we're going to take everybody who is against us into a primary on your right. >> right. >> on the republican side. >> right. >> so the threat has been issued already, even before we begin negotiating what the package will be. >> oh, yeah. >> this is like political terrorism. >> well, it's certainly a clear bargaining position. i remember three years ago talking to a longtime membe
from the right. the leader of the right's rebellion is, of course, grover norquist. he said the president has installed himself at loyalty, and boehner is not being sufficiently revolutionary. >> he thinks someone made him king. he doesn't have the mandate that he thinks he does. i think he takes us over the cliff because he has got blinders on. he doesn't see where he stands in the universe. >> jennifer: or where he stands? where the president stands? he's leader of the free world for goodness sakes. but back to the tea party senator jim demint, who was riding first class on the tea party express, he tweeted that boehner's propose is an $800 billion tax hike that will destroy jobs and allow politicians to spend even more. not so fast, demint. there is yet another front in this revolution. conservative columnist jennifer ruben dismissed demint's rhetoric and says the votes of demimit t al are no votes. oh please, smart and sensible conservatives should ignore the drivers of right-wing lunyie train and carry on. others think they're being punished for their votes. the committ
the election in 1992, and which we're still living, because that gave us grover norquist, et cetera. >> let's get to grover norquist in a minute, but i do have a question. the gop plan consists of $2.2 trillion in savings over a decade. that includes raging the eligibility age for medicare from 65 to 67. and lowering cost of living increases for social security benefits. they also propose overhauling the tax code to generate $800 billion in new revenue. but without raising taxes on the wealthy. in a letter to the president, leading republicans compared their plan to one erskine bowles drew up last year. >> not even close. >> he rejected that connection and the white house, of course, is hitting the road. we'll get to that in a moment. but here's my question. i've been watching the coverage of this and reading it. and there's a lot of liberals who were like, he won, ha, ha, they're so arrogant about it, it's hard to like them. because it's just not attractive. but he did -- >> yeah, he won. >> and he is going to the american people with this. and why can't the starting point of these negotia
to the heritage foundation he'll have to i think compete with the likes of grover norquist for the unelected leader of the republican party, because i think we'll hear from him and see a lot from him. i mean, you know, he may not have always picked candidates, thinking of murdoch and aiken, who won, but i would expect to see him continue to try to push the republican party, you know, as he did on the inside similarly from the outside using, you know, sort of the tools and the levers that the heritage foundation affords. i would just -- i would like to put in a plug for katon. i don't want to worry your chans so i'm going to resist giving my own endorsement, but you would be a wonderful addition inside republican party for voice of reason. >> look at that, katon dawson. take that the governor and see how much it helps you. >> karen just doomed my chances of winning because we don't agree on anything. i'm telling you, i put craig melvin's flame name in first th this morning. >> i'll say you're so unreasoning. >> i want you to speculate with me for a second. if it's not you, who else could it b
in the house are getting a lot of pressure from folks sort of the most rabidly anti-tax, grover norquist's good and a couple of other folks saying allowing any revenue, any rates to increase qualifies as a tax hike. >> yeah. but that's been their position all along. that was the central issue. taxes go up on the top 2% or they don't. right? it was obama versus romney. he keep come back to this that you heard bill crystal say what the hell are we doing as a party? even tom kohl said let's buy in 98% and get it out of the way and take credit for it. why is bajner refuse to go schedule a boat on that proposal. >> obtain doesn't have the votes. simple math, this is sort of the reality of washington. >> doesn't have the votes to block it? >> he doesn't have the votes to pass any kind of tax reform from his own caucus. they operate by a rule called the majority of the majority. effectively the house republicans will do whatever the majority of their caucus says is okay with. you know, they don't have that majority. >> if they deck -- okay. i am trying to understand
and keep their seats and playcate grover norquist. >> they will have to go home and explain to their constituents, many middle class people why they didn't defend them, why they basically put protecting the 2% over protecting the middle class. that is not a position you want to be in at christmas time. >> luke, the democrats will have to give up something, are they not? we know look, the republicans don't have a lot of leverage here, but if they're going to take the debt ceiling off the table, there's got to be something given on medicare and social security? >> if there is to be a big deal, then one would suspect yeah, they would have to. i think there is a group of folks on both sides that realize this is a significant moment where you could actually do something big if you wanted. but the issue seems here, alex, as long as there's no movement on the 250, what really can you do? i'll throw something out there and i think it's interesting you mention tom coburn. because you're starting to see somewhat of a divide between elder senate republicans who have been in d.c., under
: that's what i mean an animal. exactly, jim. grover norquist saying we need to put a leash on the president. not okay. twenty-nine minutes after the hour. right back on the "stephanie miller show." ♪ very, very excited about that and very proud of that. >>beltway politics from inside the loop. >>we tackle the big issues here in our nation's capital, around the country and around the globe. >>dc columnist and four time emmy winner bill press opens current's morning news block. >>we'll do our best to carry the flag from 6 to 9 every morning. >>liberal and proud of it. where you don't back down from a challenge. this is the age of knowing how to make things happen. so, why let erectile dysfunction get in your way? talk to your doctor about viagra. 20 million men already have. ask your doctor if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take viagra if you take nitrates for chest pain; it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. side effects include headache, flushing upset stomach, and abnormal vision. to avoid long-term injur
grover norquist for quite some time. you went to the meeting, his wednesday meeting. >> that's right. >> he has all the time with some of the most powerful conservatives in d.c. and across the country attending. what was their attitude about any deal that boehner might have to make? >> it's pretty interesting when you talk to house republicans because they look at boehner from two different perspectives. on one side, boehner went in front of the house conference and he said, i'm not going to back any deal that increases rates. so they feel pretty confident on rates. that's where i think "the new york times" comes from. on rates they think boehner is still with house conservatives. at the same time, there's a lot of raised eyebrows right now because just as boehner is promising not to buckle on rates, he's purging four conservatives from committee. >> i was going to ask you about that. now, newt, and bob livingston tried that with mark newman back in '95. that didn't work out well for him. we said we're going to vote against every appropriations bill that you put up now. and the next
our oath to the constitution. others will take their oath to grover norquist. >> coom meeting ceremonies. >> grover, you know, the temple on 16th street. >> maybe the capitol grill, k street. it's unbelievable. >> carnalishment this is something i hope you can get in the debate is why we are here in the first lace that republicans put us on the path to the fiscal cliff by not doing what congress -- dozens of congresses have done, which is to extend the debt limit, not spend more money on getting into debt. >> that's to pay the interest on the debt we already 0. >> that's exact right. >> we are here right now, this republican, you know, fiscal cliff because they forced us to be here because they wouldn't do the responsible thing in 2011. >> exactly. look, we are here because the republicans did what no family may america would do, they took out the credit card. they put expenses on that credit card and decided we don't want to pay what we owe. these were their decisions. history is interesting but it's not going to get us away from this cliff. what
grover norquist refuses to declare whether decoupling would violate his group's pledge, that, too, gives a whole lot of cover to the speaker. and when more and more rank-and-file republicans come out publicly every day in favor of passing the senate bill, that, too, gives cover to the speaker. you really have to absolute cram tom cole. he was the first one on the other side to dare speak the truth about what should be done on taxes and he's been on tv almost every day making the case to his party in public. the day after congressman cole went public he was dismissed as having a minority opinion. well, that's not true anymore. his comments sparked a trend. in addition to those republicans who have spoken out publicly there are probably dozens of other tom coles in the house who just don't feel free to speak their mind but agree with him privately. just this morning in an appearance on cable television, the junior senator from oklahoma, an unquestioned conservative, came out in favor of higher tax rates on the wealthy. he said -- quote -- "personally, i know we have to raise revenue. i rea
to spend on. host: do you agree with the grover norquist tax pledge to not raise taxes? caller: in service of the tax rates? yes, i do. i am also left scratching my head because i believe when the bush tax cuts were put into effect that many democrats oppose those as being bad for the economy. yet, and now, they are running around saying we cannot let the rates go back to the talks rates that we set up under president clinton -- the tax rates go back. what let's stick out with came out yesterday from the republicans. they want to bring in new revenue from tax reform, $800 billion being their calculations. do you agree with some who say that is increasing taxes? caller: yes and no. it depends. i would agree with that form of tax revenue increase if it went with spendingd reductions. host: that is where you see compromise? caller: we have been through this before. i have friends that frequently site back in reagan's presidency that president reagan increased taxes, but he did that as a consequence of an agreement with the democratic leadership with the democratic leadership
, the republican in the senate said he would break the grover norquist push. he didn't talk about the tax rates. as we all know, the key is the president's and democrats insistence on the rate going up from 35 to 39n't 6%. this week, he was much more specific. he's saying to republicans, hey, cut our losses now and live to fight another day. here he is. >> has a growing group of folks looking at this and realizing we don't have a lot of cards as it relates to the tax issue. we have one house, that's it. the presidency and the senate in the democrats hands. a lot of people are putting forth a theory. i think it has merit. you go in and give the president the 2% increase that he's talking about. the rate increase on the top 2%. all of a sudden, the shift goes back to entitlements. >> what corker is also saying, what he went on to say is when we hit the debt ceiling next year, in february, then republicans are going to have the leverage then. that's something the president dispu disputed. one problem, bob corker is a senator, he's not in the house of representatives. that's what we keep waiting to
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)